Qld Ethics Cases Practice Questions Already Passed

Kelly v London Transport Executive {Ans: Cross ref to Mullins at [25] Facts: - P was a chronic alcoholic. D was a large public transport company - D's vehicle bumped P and injured him with a cut on the head - - after receiving medical attention P returned to work but stopped working soon after. - - P claimed that he had developed depression, saying the accident was a major contributing factor. - D's solicitor had 5 separate medical examinations conducted for P. - - the result was that all 5 experts attributed the depression to his chronic alcoholism. - - all reports were sent to his lawyer - P only sent one medical report to D's solicitor but that report had been doctored in order to omit information that held an unfavourable information that was harmful to P's case. Held: - although the judgement was in favour of the plaintiff, his testimony was seen as untrustworthy and his medical evidence was rejected - P was given damages in the amount of 75 pounds Principles: - Counsel must not ask the expert to change his report so as to favour counsel's client or conceal things that may be against